That would be the equivilent of arresting you for owning a kitchen knife because someone else used a kitchen nife to murder someone.
as a legit WoW player I'm all for keeping people from hacking and cheating, but blizzard can't hold anyone responsible for the presence of the sony rootkit. they CAN, however, use it as a flag to "monitor" especialy if all of a sudden, there's a lot more accounts showing up with the rootkit processes running.
Heck almost half of the power loss from an A/C system happens whether you use it or not, the belt's already going over the compressors feed wheel.
this again is false. The compressor belt certainly turns, but it is not engaged. The pully spins freely with hardly any resistance. Try this as an experiment. Turn off your AC, get driving on a straight stretch of road with no traffic (for your own safety) get to a constant speed (even set the cruise if you have it). Then turn on the AC. You will hear and feel (and see if you have a tachometer) a sudden dip in the power output of your engine. AC Compressors take a large amount of horsepower away from the engine. This has been my experience with many different cars over a number of years. I currently drive a 2004 car so I would have to say its AC system and engine are fairly "modern".
Red Light Cams have been shown to increase the incidence of accidents in intersections, because people will panic brake for fear of a ticket.
While I doubt this to be true... if it were, it's a problem with the morons following too close behind the first car that are causing the accidents. Not the person who is, and should be, stopping for the red light.
Those numbers are skewed. Today's cars use more gas at highway speeds if only one window is down compared to the air conditioning.
Completely false. This statement is a common urban legend, and nothing more.
Using your AC taps mechanical power from the engine. This requires you to use more gas to maintain the same speed. Opening your windows adds some wind resistance, but doesn't add the same amount of loss as engaging the AC compressor. (you should watch mythbusters sometime, its a great show!)
well... I think I've gained some weight recently. If the earth is spinner faster... then we've all just gotten a little bit heavier, have we not? Anyone know what the exact difference would be, with that change in rotation speed?
Line up the three images in order and tab through them. THe time between each image is very short. Therefore the "line" was in for an extreemly short period of time. To me, the line looks like what you would see had a string or hair passed in front of the lens as it were capturing that frame. The glint on the end could simply be something on teh end of it. First thing that comes to mind would be a spider
"the spiders can fly by wire, called "ballooning". The spider raises her abdomen and releases a thread in the breeze that grows longer and longer until the upward lift is sufficient and the spider is lifted."
perhaps not THAT particular spider.. thats just the first google link that demonstrates my point.
so, sorry... there really is nothing to see here. Move along. No looking into the light thingy necessary.
There's also a much less subjective reason utilities are requried to share the foundations they lay. There is only so much room ON the pole to begin with. There are strict regulations, both for safety and quality of service, that dictate how close one service line is to another, be it power, cable, copper telephone etc. The poles are only so high, and they can't run wire any lower than X feet (or they'd be clothes-lining pedestrians/semi trucks). If comm companies were given monoply rights to the fiber, telephone, cable etc. There would, literaly, be no room for compitition and they would then have a literal monopoly.
If someone is so unmotivated that they aren't going to vote because they think their voice is not important, simply telling them "sure it is!" is hardly convincing (or worthwhile).
So your suggesting it's better to just not say anything? That seems highly irresponsible.
As far as if the commercial "says" its important or if it "teaches" why its important, your arguments, as are mine, are groundless as we have not seen the actual commercials. But I hardly see how they should be criticized for trying to tell people that their vote is important.
Explain to me the difference between "saying" your vote is important and "teaching" your vote is important? Then explain the difference in "saying" Hillary Clinton is NYs senator and "teaching" that Hillary Clinton is NYs senator?
"in the begining" I know Women and non-whites weren't allowed to vote. I think the Felon clauses were in place as well. Were there others? Of the, "able-bodied white males" were there restrictions? If I remember right, income, education, rank in society, etc were not considered baring factors in any way.
(but this wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong;o) )
...it's something someone can learn reading a piece of paper while waiting on line to vote. or perhaps on a commercial on MTV? Presented by cartoon characters or game characters because it will grab the viewers attention?
See what I mean by the delivery isn't as important as the message?
It's rather obvious that someone who already plans on voting isn't going to gain any additional motivation from the ads (of course, even thats arguable. You can re-inforce something someone already knows to ensure they follow through.) The people already motivated to vote are NOT the people these ads target. They are targeting people WITH and opion that DONT plan on voting. The two are mutually exclusive.
1) You CAN be informed and vote. 2) You CAN be UNinformed and vote. 3) You CAN be UNinformed, and not vote. 4) You CAN be informed, and not vote.
those who are "uninformed of the issues" are those who are likely not to vote regardless of motivation. These ads, and other "your vote counts" messages are targeted at those who ARE INFORMED but lack motivation. Those that fall into the 4th category are the people these ads truely target.
This is what is frustrating me. Being informed enough to want to voice your political opinion is the goal that we should be shooting for. Someones level of motivation and their level of knowledge have absolutely nothing to do with each other. I could be 100% for or against a particular candidate for, by your standards even, "a well informed reason". But just don't think it matters if I vote. Perhaps the couple of elections I witnessed, the candidate I would have voted for, had I voted, got elected so I don't think I need to vote. These are the people that SHOULD VOTE. They have an opinion, they ARE informed, they just don't think their vote counts or matters. You and I know this isn't true, and we're trying to INFORM THEM that it isn't true. Why is convincing people that their vote matters a bad thing?
No one is talking about WHO these people are going to vote for. Are these commercials partison in anyway? I don't know if they are because I haven't seen them. I get the feeling these are going to be more along the lines of, "you're vote is important. Make your opinion count and go vote". I don't think these messages are going to have anything to do with which candidate to vote for. (as that has typically been the stance of the Choose or Loose commercials. non-partison, simply motivation)
What is wrong with using any possible means to get someone to realise that the system only works when they participate? No matter which candidate the viewer thinks should win, these commercials are promoting participation in our goverment. Why is that a bad thing?
I agree that someone who's not motivated by ANYTHING else and sees these commercials is probably not going to be motivated by the commercial alone.
What about the millions of fence sitters? The people who are a little motivated by current events; a little motivated by their family; a little motivated by friends. What about when they see hte commercial and this motivates them a little more? Is that a bad thing?
"I think people ought to be able to demonstrate a basic knowledge of how our election process works, " I thinking going to vote is a pretty good demonstration that they understand how the process works!
So you have someone who is not motivated by current events, not motivated by friends, family, and teachers...
But they are motivated by a fictional video game character... I agree with the grandparent post. So then what about someone who's not motivated by games, nor family, nor current events, but is motivated by a friend. Is that any better? Do you know who their friend is? What if their friend is an ex-con? What if their friend is a priest? Does it matter who the friend is? What about someone who's not motivated by any of the above but is motivated by some other factor? What does it matter where the motivation comes from? Motivation and Knowledge have absolutely NOTHING to do with each other. Motivating someone to vote is a respectable goal no matter what the means.
Are you saying that someone who lacks motivation has no right to vote? That because they don't have motivation means their opinions have to be wrong or are simply less important?
The basis of the voting process in this country is that EVERYONE HAS A VOICE! When this country was founded do you have ANY idea what the illiteracy rate was? Should those people not have been allowed to vote?
Well, yes and no. There are a lot of adults who watch Spongebob. I'll admit to watching an episidoe on occasion.:o)
In regards to the smoking thing, it's hard to judge. Typically, kids are rebellious, telling them not to do something often makes them curious about what your telling them not to do. At the same time, kids want to "be grown up" and if you tell them voting is important and something all grown ups should do, then when they turn 18, they might want to vote simply because as a child it was something they saw as a "grown up thing to do"
So you are then implying that gamers are uninformed? Simply because someone needs motivation to vote, does not necessarily mean they are also uninformed.
If you do decide to get a laptop, do NOT get a laptop bag. Get a backpack that carries a laptop with your books. The fat breifcase style bags just scream out "HEY! I HAVE A LAPTOP INSIDE" and the second you set it down (to pay for your lunch, check out the books at the library, wash your hands in the bathroom, etc) it becomes a target. if you get a backpack, it's just like every other backpack on campus and doesn't draw any extra attention to you on the street/in the quad. Plus, you wear it like a backpack and you don't have to set it down to do things with your hands.
...is exactly why the olympics leave a bad taste in my mouth.
"...the interests of broadcast rightsholders and accredited media come first."
they've made it very clear the only thing the IOC is concerned about is how much money they can rake in. Ever since they split up the winter and summer olympics, so the IOC can profit twice as often, I couldn't care less about the olympics.
Slashdot Mirror
That would be the equivilent of arresting you for owning a kitchen knife because someone else used a kitchen nife to murder someone.
as a legit WoW player I'm all for keeping people from hacking and cheating, but blizzard can't hold anyone responsible for the presence of the sony rootkit. they CAN, however, use it as a flag to "monitor" especialy if all of a sudden, there's a lot more accounts showing up with the rootkit processes running.
"However, it is common for many different, unrelated Web sites to share the same IP address."
It is?
Heck almost half of the power loss from an A/C system happens whether you use it or not, the belt's already going over the compressors feed wheel.
this again is false. The compressor belt certainly turns, but it is not engaged. The pully spins freely with hardly any resistance. Try this as an experiment. Turn off your AC, get driving on a straight stretch of road with no traffic (for your own safety) get to a constant speed (even set the cruise if you have it). Then turn on the AC. You will hear and feel (and see if you have a tachometer) a sudden dip in the power output of your engine. AC Compressors take a large amount of horsepower away from the engine. This has been my experience with many different cars over a number of years. I currently drive a 2004 car so I would have to say its AC system and engine are fairly "modern".
Red Light Cams have been shown to increase the incidence of accidents in intersections, because people will panic brake for fear of a ticket.
While I doubt this to be true... if it were, it's a problem with the morons following too close behind the first car that are causing the accidents. Not the person who is, and should be, stopping for the red light.
Those numbers are skewed. Today's cars use more gas at highway speeds if only one window is down compared to the air conditioning.
Completely false. This statement is a common urban legend, and nothing more.
Using your AC taps mechanical power from the engine. This requires you to use more gas to maintain the same speed. Opening your windows adds some wind resistance, but doesn't add the same amount of loss as engaging the AC compressor. (you should watch mythbusters sometime, its a great show!)
well... I think I've gained some weight recently. If the earth is spinner faster... then we've all just gotten a little bit heavier, have we not? Anyone know what the exact difference would be, with that change in rotation speed?
Line up the three images in order and tab through them. THe time between each image is very short. Therefore the "line" was in for an extreemly short period of time. To me, the line looks like what you would see had a string or hair passed in front of the lens as it were capturing that frame. The glint on the end could simply be something on teh end of it. First thing that comes to mind would be a spider
"the spiders can fly by wire, called "ballooning". The spider raises her abdomen and releases a thread in the breeze that grows longer and longer until the upward lift is sufficient and the spider is lifted."
perhaps not THAT particular spider.. thats just the first google link that demonstrates my point.
so, sorry... there really is nothing to see here. Move along. No looking into the light thingy necessary.
There's also a much less subjective reason utilities are requried to share the foundations they lay. There is only so much room ON the pole to begin with. There are strict regulations, both for safety and quality of service, that dictate how close one service line is to another, be it power, cable, copper telephone etc. The poles are only so high, and they can't run wire any lower than X feet (or they'd be clothes-lining pedestrians/semi trucks). If comm companies were given monoply rights to the fiber, telephone, cable etc. There would, literaly, be no room for compitition and they would then have a literal monopoly.
If someone is so unmotivated that they aren't going to vote because they think their voice is not important, simply telling them "sure it is!" is hardly convincing (or worthwhile).
So your suggesting it's better to just not say anything? That seems highly irresponsible.
As far as if the commercial "says" its important or if it "teaches" why its important, your arguments, as are mine, are groundless as we have not seen the actual commercials. But I hardly see how they should be criticized for trying to tell people that their vote is important.
Explain to me the difference between "saying" your vote is important and "teaching" your vote is important? Then explain the difference in "saying" Hillary Clinton is NYs senator and "teaching" that Hillary Clinton is NYs senator?
"in the begining" I know Women and non-whites weren't allowed to vote. I think the Felon clauses were in place as well. Were there others? Of the, "able-bodied white males" were there restrictions? If I remember right, income, education, rank in society, etc were not considered baring factors in any way.
;o) )
(but this wouldn't be the first time I've been wrong
Being motivated to vote and being informed are two different things
I agree 100% with this.
What are the current ads teaching?
They're "teaching" that your vote is important and that you shold participate in your government by voting. Right?
...it's something someone can learn reading a piece of paper while waiting on line to vote.
or perhaps on a commercial on MTV? Presented by cartoon characters or game characters because it will grab the viewers attention?
See what I mean by the delivery isn't as important as the message?
It's rather obvious that someone who already plans on voting isn't going to gain any additional motivation from the ads (of course, even thats arguable. You can re-inforce something someone already knows to ensure they follow through.) The people already motivated to vote are NOT the people these ads target. They are targeting people WITH and opion that DONT plan on voting. The two are mutually exclusive.
1) You CAN be informed and vote.
2) You CAN be UNinformed and vote.
3) You CAN be UNinformed, and not vote.
4) You CAN be informed, and not vote.
those who are "uninformed of the issues" are those who are likely not to vote regardless of motivation. These ads, and other "your vote counts" messages are targeted at those who ARE INFORMED but lack motivation. Those that fall into the 4th category are the people these ads truely target.
This is what is frustrating me.
Being informed enough to want to voice your political opinion is the goal that we should be shooting for.
Someones level of motivation and their level of knowledge have absolutely nothing to do with each other. I could be 100% for or against a particular candidate for, by your standards even, "a well informed reason". But just don't think it matters if I vote. Perhaps the couple of elections I witnessed, the candidate I would have voted for, had I voted, got elected so I don't think I need to vote. These are the people that SHOULD VOTE. They have an opinion, they ARE informed, they just don't think their vote counts or matters. You and I know this isn't true, and we're trying to INFORM THEM that it isn't true. Why is convincing people that their vote matters a bad thing?
No one is talking about WHO these people are going to vote for. Are these commercials partison in anyway? I don't know if they are because I haven't seen them. I get the feeling these are going to be more along the lines of, "you're vote is important. Make your opinion count and go vote". I don't think these messages are going to have anything to do with which candidate to vote for. (as that has typically been the stance of the Choose or Loose commercials. non-partison, simply motivation)
What is wrong with using any possible means to get someone to realise that the system only works when they participate? No matter which candidate the viewer thinks should win, these commercials are promoting participation in our goverment. Why is that a bad thing?
I agree that someone who's not motivated by ANYTHING else and sees these commercials is probably not going to be motivated by the commercial alone.
What about the millions of fence sitters? The people who are a little motivated by current events; a little motivated by their family; a little motivated by friends. What about when they see hte commercial and this motivates them a little more? Is that a bad thing?
"I think people ought to be able to demonstrate a basic knowledge of how our election process works, "
I thinking going to vote is a pretty good demonstration that they understand how the process works!
So you have someone who is not motivated by current events, not motivated by friends, family, and teachers...
But they are motivated by a fictional video game character... I agree with the grandparent post.
So then what about someone who's not motivated by games, nor family, nor current events, but is motivated by a friend. Is that any better? Do you know who their friend is? What if their friend is an ex-con? What if their friend is a priest? Does it matter who the friend is? What about someone who's not motivated by any of the above but is motivated by some other factor? What does it matter where the motivation comes from? Motivation and Knowledge have absolutely NOTHING to do with each other. Motivating someone to vote is a respectable goal no matter what the means.
Are you saying that someone who lacks motivation has no right to vote? That because they don't have motivation means their opinions have to be wrong or are simply less important?
The basis of the voting process in this country is that EVERYONE HAS A VOICE! When this country was founded do you have ANY idea what the illiteracy rate was? Should those people not have been allowed to vote?
Well, yes and no. There are a lot of adults who watch Spongebob. I'll admit to watching an episidoe on occasion. :o)
In regards to the smoking thing, it's hard to judge. Typically, kids are rebellious, telling them not to do something often makes them curious about what your telling them not to do. At the same time, kids want to "be grown up" and if you tell them voting is important and something all grown ups should do, then when they turn 18, they might want to vote simply because as a child it was something they saw as a "grown up thing to do"
JMO.
Thank you.
(and what is this "must wait 20 seconds after you hit Reply"? It only takes me 2 seconds to type "Thank you."!)
So you are then implying that gamers are uninformed? Simply because someone needs motivation to vote, does not necessarily mean they are also uninformed.
useless link requires a login! Anyone have a mirror?
If you do decide to get a laptop, do NOT get a laptop bag. Get a backpack that carries a laptop with your books. The fat breifcase style bags just scream out "HEY! I HAVE A LAPTOP INSIDE" and the second you set it down (to pay for your lunch, check out the books at the library, wash your hands in the bathroom, etc) it becomes a target. if you get a backpack, it's just like every other backpack on campus and doesn't draw any extra attention to you on the street/in the quad. Plus, you wear it like a backpack and you don't have to set it down to do things with your hands.
...is exactly why the olympics leave a bad taste in my mouth.
"...the interests of broadcast rightsholders and accredited media come first."
they've made it very clear the only thing the IOC is concerned about is how much money they can rake in. Ever since they split up the winter and summer olympics, so the IOC can profit twice as often, I couldn't care less about the olympics.
I thought the same thing when I watched the video. It looks like the "helicopter" is dangling from a string and just swaying back and forth!